Urban Growth Control Essay ⋆ Environment Essay Examples ⋆ EssayEmpire

This Urban Growth Control Essay example is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic, please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.

The term urban growth control is used to describe a broad set of growth management strategies intended to combat urban sprawl and its social and environmental consequences. For growth control advocates, it is generally the spatial expansion or “growth” of cities that necessitates “control,” not the size of its population. Urban growth control may therefore be characterized as a set of land use planning policies meant to limit the suburbanization of metropolitan areas.

The urban growth control movement in the United States is a key element of “smart growth” policies and the Livability Agenda promoted by both Bill Clinton and Al Gore. These agendas are generally interested in producing cities that are compact and dense while at the same time livable, convenient, and pedestrian-friendly. As of 2005, 28 states had institutionalized growth management programs. However, in many cases the most rigorous growth control legislation is administered through county and municipal governments.

The rapid horizontal expansion of cities to suburban and exurban areas is a major cause of concern for the urban growth control movement. Urban sprawl is characterized by a variety of distinct land use patterns. First, large-scale municipal and commercial developments such as wide streets, broad parking lots, large retail stores, and expansive office parks all consume large land areas. Second, lowdensity housing developments add urbanized land disproportionately to increased population. Third, homogenous housing and commercial development often result in low structural diversity and uniform building designs. And fourth, segregated, single-use zoning results in commercial, residential, and business zones that are separated by large distances.

There are many effects of urban sprawl. Urban growth control advocates argue that suburban sprawl diverts financial resources away from valuable urban infrastructure by funding new and upgraded road and highway projects; consumes open space with ecological value such as forests and wetlands; subdivides and impinges upon productive agricultural regions; produces a culture of singleoccupant vehicle use as residents of suburban and exurban areas become increasingly dependent on automobiles to move between single-use areas and to and from the urban core; creates longer commutes, which in turn raises air pollution levels as well as driver fatality rates; and increasingly segregates the citizenry of metropolitan areas along class, cultural, and racial lines, most notably captured in the movement of white middle-class populations to suburban areas, a phenomenon called White Flight.

Opponents contend that urban growth leads to less traffic because the driving population is spread over a larger area, which in turn leads to lower pollution levels. They argue that urban growth control will lead to higher real estate prices inside the growth boundary, placing a burden on low and middle-income households, and a loss of freedom by citizens to choose where they live and work.

A variety of growth management policy tool options are available to urban planners attempting to control sprawl. Traditional policy tools include zoning ordinances and land use regulations. Another common policy option necessitates the establishment of certain public facilities such as water, sewage, and electricity as a precondition to suburban development. Still another option consists of infill and redevelopment strategies in the urban core-especially high density housing options, mixed use development, and viable downtown transportation alternatives.

Urban growth boundaries (UGBs), also referred to as urban and rural “limit lines,” present another zoning policy option for controlling sprawl. The establishment of urban growth boundaries is an intentional effort to control urban sprawl by assigning the area inside the boundary for high-density settlement and the area outside for low-density development. Areas outside of the UGB are often referred to as greenbelts. Low-density development outside the UGB can be a misleading term. While the overall density is low, many growth management plans mandate smaller, dense settlement clusters surrounded by agricultural and/or open space outside the UGB.

Urban growth boundaries are not without controversy. In limiting growth outside of the growth boundary in favor of open space, critics argue that politicians are effectively telling landowners in these areas what they can and cannot do with their property. Legislation promoting UGBs is oftentimes contested by suburban and rural citizens who argue that their private property loses value under restrictive land use policies. Citing the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, these groups argue they should be duly compensated for land “takings.” Others, including many urban residents, counter by citing public trust doctrines that stipulate that the ecosystem services provided by preserved spaces are in fact common property to be valued and used by everyone.

Bibliography:

American Planning Association, www.planning.org;
Andres Duany, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, Jeff Speck, Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream (North Point Press, 2001);
Dolores Hayden, Building Suburbia: Green Fields and Urban Growth, 1820-2000 (Vintage, 2004);
Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities (Vintage, 1994);
Sustainable Communities Network, smartgrowth.org.